-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Unity Has An Image Problem (Jimquisition 7/24/17)
- Thread starter Pop-O-Matic
- Start date
Triforce141
Member
That took awhile to post
I feel like both Jim and the person tweeting missed the point of what's really going on, of course the idea that games journalists are at fault is bullshit but also I cannot imagine the throng of shitty asset flips are actually what's causing people to hate Unity.
Those games are not popular, they're played by basically nobody, it's the excellent and hugely popular games with common problems like poor console performance or stuttering on high spec PC's or no proper support for windowed fullscreen + exclusive fullscreen + regular windowed mode. etc etc etc.
Because those are the games people actually play in large numbers, and despite often not having Unity logos on their boot sequences (though they generally must on consoles for various reasons) players still find out be it through the community or places like digital foundry or the developers talking about it openly.
I hope those are the kinds of issues Unity is putting its efforts towards working with developers on solutions for (Be it engine side improvements and/or just better educating people on known best practices to avoid the quirks), not trying to solve the unsolvable issue of people making bad games for an audience that doesn't exist. More people assuredly see these horrible asset flips on Jim's excellent and hilarious videos than play them on Steam itself.
Those games are not popular, they're played by basically nobody, it's the excellent and hugely popular games with common problems like poor console performance or stuttering on high spec PC's or no proper support for windowed fullscreen + exclusive fullscreen + regular windowed mode. etc etc etc.
Because those are the games people actually play in large numbers, and despite often not having Unity logos on their boot sequences (though they generally must on consoles for various reasons) players still find out be it through the community or places like digital foundry or the developers talking about it openly.
I hope those are the kinds of issues Unity is putting its efforts towards working with developers on solutions for (Be it engine side improvements and/or just better educating people on known best practices to avoid the quirks), not trying to solve the unsolvable issue of people making bad games for an audience that doesn't exist. More people assuredly see these horrible asset flips on Jim's excellent and hilarious videos than play them on Steam itself.
The difference being that people have to buy and play video games, and people's eyeballs just happen to see bad photoshops.
I agree. But, to be fair, I'm not one of the people who feel like a game being Unity is a reason not to buy it, it's more of a "oh boy, get ready for stuttering", but if I want the game I'll still get it. Maybe the people who get to the point of refusing to buy games actually do have their perception impacted by some of the worse games.
I also have to imagine the amount of people who play these higher profile Unity games and also think some minor performance issues are enough reason to stop buying are a really tiny minority. A niche inside the niche.
So maybe it was never that big of an issue in the first place.
Gotdatmoney
Member
The platform is free and used by many people who are not necessarily AAA developers. Further more if I understand correctly it doesn't provide source code access. Strikes me as a recipe for lots of bad ports. But you can totally make a good game in this engine.
No I think you're right, it's not a large number of people. But also as you said, it's now something that pops in to your mind ("get ready for stuttering") which is definitely harmful and part of a trend that's increasing not decreasing.
As someone who relies on Unity to make a living it's in my best interests to see that trend go the other way, but that can't be done by ignoring issues or blaming the wrong things so I hope some of the common problems are solved.
michaelius
Banned
Noone forces them to buy those games.
Earthbound64
Banned
LordRaptor
Member
"Massively Distorted Public Perception Not The Real Issue" Says Man Massively Distorting Public Perception
R_thanatos
Member
Well , i agree with Jim , the problem is not the engine but certainly how they let people use it.
I mean eaglejump use it 
*wink wink*
*wink wink*Pretty much. I really don't see this changing unless middleware engines go back to how they were a decade ago with devs having to pay thousands of dollars to access them.
Right, but those shitty games still turn people off of the good games.
They could still stand to do some better advertising of the good games that use Unity. I'm sure most people only know of Unity from shitty console ports with terrible performance instead of the tons of quality games.
LordRaptor
Member
They do a sizzle reel every year for GDC - this is last years - but they don't have E3 press conferences because pretty much the point of the tweet that sparked this off is that what engine a game uses is not particularly relevant to end consumers.
Alexander DeLarge
Member
If this is all about poor performance, why doesn't Unreal Engine have this problem? The majority of UE4 games I've played run like shit and I've been on high-end hardware since Unreal Engine 4 released.
But it is their fault that those people serve as advertisement for them.
On the topic of the Ubisoft part, I feel like it's a bit disingenuous. Since the data only confirms PC play counts lost 95% of players. Outside of Siege, almost all Ubisoft games see huge drop off PC while on the Console space, stay relatively popular. I have no doubt the Console player bases fell as well, but the data only exists for one platform of 3.
JonnyDBrit
Member
Opening on an extended Allo Allo reference. Bold move.
Otherwise, I feel like a third source of Unity's image issues, somewhat related to the other two, is its common enough usage in early access titles. Games like Subnautica, Kerbal Space Program, and Guns of Icarus. Games that spend years being playable while being technically incomplete, and I believe the 'technically incomplete' point can end up forgotten in the background, leaving only the association of Unity being uses for games that, even if generally functional, have weird hang-ups and performance issues.
This applies even to games where players only see the early development, rather than have to deal with it themselves. I remember when Prey of the Gods achieved its funding goals, and in particular revealed they were going to include XBO and PS4 ports regardless because the common architecture and nature of Unity itself made it possible for the team to port the game without additional assistance, and some people's initial response was how poorly the ports ran because of using Unity. Nevermind the devs continually stressing that these were bare minimum ports with no real optimisation whatsoever. There were problems, the game uses Unity, ergo those problems would be gone if they just weren't using Unity.
Otherwise, I feel like a third source of Unity's image issues, somewhat related to the other two, is its common enough usage in early access titles. Games like Subnautica, Kerbal Space Program, and Guns of Icarus. Games that spend years being playable while being technically incomplete, and I believe the 'technically incomplete' point can end up forgotten in the background, leaving only the association of Unity being uses for games that, even if generally functional, have weird hang-ups and performance issues.
This applies even to games where players only see the early development, rather than have to deal with it themselves. I remember when Prey of the Gods achieved its funding goals, and in particular revealed they were going to include XBO and PS4 ports regardless because the common architecture and nature of Unity itself made it possible for the team to port the game without additional assistance, and some people's initial response was how poorly the ports ran because of using Unity. Nevermind the devs continually stressing that these were bare minimum ports with no real optimisation whatsoever. There were problems, the game uses Unity, ergo those problems would be gone if they just weren't using Unity.
Lord of Ostia
Member
More games are made with Unity
C.Olimar788
Member
For once I feel like this was a really weak episode. While Unity's image problem is primarily the fault of Unity itself and really needs to be fixed, desperately, some of the onus definitely should be applied to journalists. Can they talk about engines? Sure. They should! But they are not experts, and when they throw an entire game engine under the bus because it has an influx of bad games, it hurts a lot of genuine artists and developers. It's like if art critics started covering a lot of crayon drawings by kids and functionally said crayon drawings were all shit, thus discrediting crayon drawings by people who work hard on them.
The episode didn't do anything for me since it was mostly this weirdly-defensive first half coupled with just a retread of the other Unity Jimquisition he did last year.
The episode didn't do anything for me since it was mostly this weirdly-defensive first half coupled with just a retread of the other Unity Jimquisition he did last year.
Pretty much how I see the situation. Jim's main focus for a lot of his content is to highlight shitty games and asset flips, so naturally his mind goes to that as the main culprit. It's not a slight against Jim, it's how our squishy grey matter works.
In essence, he is correct. These games are part of the problem, but only part of something much bigger. Just as much as how the accessible the engine is, to where pretty much anyone with a PC can develop a piece of garbage and sell it on the Steam storefront. Also, how the free version forces you to advertise the game engine in a splash screen. It's certain customers' inherent bias against any product that uses it. The issues are many, and may be too many to list here.
I would say that his video is a step in the right direction, coupled with the original tweet by Adrian. Adrian's original argument is more than likely placing the blame where there is none (game journalists), but the basis for the tweet isn't unfounded.
What's rather telling is that this conversation has been going on for nearly a week now and the creators of Unity haven't said anything, as far as I can tell. If so, would someone be able to post a link?
Yeah, if changing some default settings can help that, they definitely should get to it. I know game development isn't simple, but someone posted a screenshot in the other thread where it was literally a box for you to check in order to include exclusive fullscreen, haha. And that's not even something I personally care about, but if it's that easy to include...
Ricerocket
Member
I hope it's not as bad as people make it seem. I've been enjoying Subnautica lately and it's run on Unity and the excuse for bad performance is that optimization hasn't started until recently when the final content just released. Hope it goes well...
It's not Unity's problem in the sense that they have any kind of responsibility to players playing those games but it is Unity's problem in the sense that this makes them and their product look bad, consequently could make devs/games using their product look bad (as has happened in the case that this video is in response to) and could thus lead to devs thinking twice about using Unity. I don't think that they're losing a whole lot of business over it at the moment but it's still "their problem" in that sense.
I don't understand blaming 'games journalism' for the issue, since they're not the ones making Unity games with sub-par performance.
Unity can be used to turn out great games with stellar performance, but if you look at the broad range of games released using it, that seems more like the exception than the rule. If it's not the media's fault, and it's not the engine's fault...who does that leave?
Let's blame gamers next, maybe that'll solve it.
Unity can be used to turn out great games with stellar performance, but if you look at the broad range of games released using it, that seems more like the exception than the rule. If it's not the media's fault, and it's not the engine's fault...who does that leave?
Let's blame gamers next, maybe that'll solve it.
The people who are making the shitty games???
CamHostage
Member
Right, Jim and Adrian are poles on the spectrum, and I'm only concerned with being in the middle and thinking, "Unity's swell, but couldn't it be better?"
These commonly-cited issues that have earned Unity its reputation are unfortunate and hopefully can be addressed some day in a meaningful way. I'm not concerned about amateurs failing to make rock-solid performers, but when games by experienced or talented new studios often seem to hit on a few recognizable hurdles, that's an unwelcome trend. Of course, every engine has its issues (and it's probably unfair to blame Unity since there's a jump to conclusions now every single time a game coughs a bit,) but these are reported frequently enough that it'd be great for something that could help alleviate the pain points.
R_thanatos
Member
The thing is ..there are plenty of games running on unity that are perfectly optimised to the point that you wouldn't know that it use unity if you don't look for it.
acknowledging an existing problem is not a problem, no.
LordRaptor
Member
Why would they?
People who are likely to be customers of Unity aren't ignorant as to what exactly an engine does.
Its like if/when Jeremy Clarkson starts droning on about how hybrid engines are shitty and all the people who think Jeremy Clarkson is quality bants start going "yeah, fuck hybrids, petrol all the way" Honda don't need to come out and do damage control because the people actually making actual cars have a wide spectrum of engineering needs and are still probably going to buy a Honda hybrid engine.
I mean he's been looking at shitty steam games for a while and focusing on how all of them are terrible Unity asset flips
acknowledging an existing problem is not a problem, no.
What a bizarre question. If a game on Unity runs poorly it's ultimately the developers working on the project who are to blame. Whether they didn't research the engine thoroughly enough and bit off more than they can chew, or if they didn't even give two seconds of thought to making the game run more efficiently, something went wrong in development.
Blaming Unity itself is absurd and ignorant.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Like someone said above, focusing on those to say that Unity has a perception problem when it's really not the main cause of it is like using bad photoshops to say that PS is a bad program. Blaming the engine specifically is always absurd when it's a whole multitude of issues that can lead to anyone game having performance issues.
EDIT:Also literally the only platform with a verifiable dropoff is PC, which tends to be the worst platform for discussing the player retention of Ubi's titles.
Why are you repeating your self. A lot of Jim's old videos make fun of unity, he's part of why unity gets a bad rap these days.
SugarDaddy
Member
Yeah, I don't really understand the hate, Unity has its quirks but so does UE4 or any other game engine for that matter. You can make dog shit on any engine, but there are enough quality games made on Unity that I can't say it deserves it's notoriety. I think a lot of what fucked people up possibly was the transition from Unity 4 to Unity 5, i'm sure for a lot of devs making that transition was frustrating. But really I think it's just a hot topic, Yooka-Laylee poisoned peoples perception of Unity, I think
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
I feel like Jim really missed the mark in this video.
Unity allows garbage to be made with their engine because making garbage is how you learn. And if you get someone to learn on your platform, they might become a professional on your platform later (see Microsoft Office, Adobe).
Why are we getting mad at Unity for letting students and aspiring developers show some pride in their projects? Sure, they might be awful games, but it just seems like seriously misplaced anger to get mad at the engine or the developer for providing a creative outlet and professional toolset to those with a hint of aspiration.
Steam is the digital video game distributor. Steam should solely share the blame for allowing garbage to be sold and distributed on their marketplace.
Sony and Microsoft both have fairly rigorous QA and certification processes that prevent the same garbage from reaching their marketplaces, and while they're not perfect, they're way better than Steam.
I also don't think he responded to Adrian Forest's point, which is that there's obviously some sort of consumer misinformation about what a "game engine" is and what it does. If consumers are rejecting a game based on its engine, then they probably don't have a great grasp of the role of the engine in the development process.
Unity allows garbage to be made with their engine because making garbage is how you learn. And if you get someone to learn on your platform, they might become a professional on your platform later (see Microsoft Office, Adobe).
Why are we getting mad at Unity for letting students and aspiring developers show some pride in their projects? Sure, they might be awful games, but it just seems like seriously misplaced anger to get mad at the engine or the developer for providing a creative outlet and professional toolset to those with a hint of aspiration.
Steam is the digital video game distributor. Steam should solely share the blame for allowing garbage to be sold and distributed on their marketplace.
Sony and Microsoft both have fairly rigorous QA and certification processes that prevent the same garbage from reaching their marketplaces, and while they're not perfect, they're way better than Steam.
I also don't think he responded to Adrian Forest's point, which is that there's obviously some sort of consumer misinformation about what a "game engine" is and what it does. If consumers are rejecting a game based on its engine, then they probably don't have a great grasp of the role of the engine in the development process.
what I said continues to be applicable
NXGamer
Member
Not in the context of how the engine is simply tagged as the reasons. It is not simply the engine's fault, more the success of it, the appeal of game making and the sheer amount of students that learn on it.
In today's "Greenlit" era you can release for money what used to be freeware, demo scene or cover mounted, Unity simply makes that as easy as ever before, but making a (half decent) game still requires skill and effort.
Jim has not helped before with his videos, and this does not either.
A similar situation to the one at hand would be more akin to Honda licensing their engines out to any would-be car manufacturer, and then said manufacturers slap together a lemon and sell it with the Honda branding all over it. Would Honda allow their name to be dragged through the mud?
I think the creators of Unity's hands are tied right now because Unity is supposed to be a very accessible engine for game making, and if they start walling it off they are going against what their engine is all about. The thing that makes Unity so great is also what gives it a bad reputation in the eyes of many people.
NormalFish
Banned
Why do you come to each one of these threads just to start a fight?